The argument appears to be, insofar as Ireland is considered, whether Geithner was a key actor in determining the outcome of the IMF/ECB/Irish negotiations, or whether he was the fall guy, someone the ECB could use as cover for a very regressive, bank bondholder driven, austerity policy directed at Ireland.

We have Morgan Kelly arguing he was a key actor, apparently based on an account from an IMF source with knowledge of the negotiations. Morgan Kelly is an economic historian, not an insider in either IMF or Irish Government circles, and so we have to make a judgement call on how reliable his source and his account is.  Based on his track record, and based on only partial denials coming out of Washington, I would tend to believe him on this occasion, mainly because the ECB have no need of a US scapegoat:  they are doing exactly what they think they should eb doing, and making no apologies for it.

You are free to differ, and seem to be arguing that Geithner is a much misunderstood and maligned guy, both by Morgan Kelly and by US progressives more generally.  That is an argument I am not qualified to get into, but I suspect the position people will adopt depends on their view of the Obama administrator's dealing with wall street more generally.

This is a topic which deserves a diary of its own, and does not deserve to be buried in a 250+ comment stream where only 3 or 4 people are still involved.  From an Irish point of view, if we are looking for support from the US administration, it is important that we understand the internal dynamics and politics at work within that administration.

So please Rootless2, give us a diary on what you consider to be Geithner's approach to dealing with the financial crisis as it has unfolded in the US and Europe, and how it might differ from the approach of the Germans and the ECB.

Index of Frank's Diaries